There is no spontaneous relationship

Post Reply New Topic

I've tried that,it doesn't work. in fact I've been treated better by average and pretty girls
than geeky and ugly girls.

I would have to agree with this statement. Both parties in the relationship have to be on the same level intellectually, spiritually, philisophically, that sort of thing.

It is extremely difficult to comment on these sorts of threads. No matter what sex we are discussing they cannot all be tarred with the same brush. Not all people are alike. Ok, so not all women are intellectual, some are superficial, but they are not the kind of women I want to be friends with, so I just avoid that sort and look for people that think like me. I mean, if I am selective about who I become friends with, then why are men not selective about who they date?

Some men need to realize that women are individuals and stop viewing women as a mammal to get it off with. Be discerning (synonyms: selective, tasteful, refined, cultivated, cultured, sophisticated, enlightened, sensitive) A woman isn't worth hitting on just because she has a vagina. Look for a woman with qualities you respect and value and try and hone the good things about yourself and turn yourself into the kind of person you respect. If you have nothing to offer in a conversational, well rounded human being sort of way, then how do you expect to attract a woman with well rounded interests.

We don't really know how the OP on any thread like this comes across in conversation because we've never had a real life conversation with them. I'm never going to be attracted to a guy that breaths through his mouth and mumbles at me when he talks to me and doesn't wash his hair. Doesn't matter if he owns a house, car or runs his own business. If he can't hold a conversation with me then what's the point?

Last edited by hurtloam on 20 Dec 2013, 4:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I think you misunderstood the question. Have there been women in your life that wanted to date you? what were the reasons you said no? What reasons did you have for passing over a girl you kind of knew, but didn't think of as girlfriend material? Just as you looked at them, listened to them and evaluated them, in turn when you approach a woman she will evaluate you. Maybe your reasoning is more similar than you realise.

edit : sorry my spelling is awful today

Last edited by hurtloam on 20 Dec 2013, 4:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

^ yep spot on

well,did you date other men before him.if so,then you choosen him out of all men
you dated before,shows your legit in your belief.

Ahhhh. Now I see your problem. Look, emotions are individual. It doesn't matter what other people say to you and what books you read on the subject, the actual real truth (and you really can trust me on this) is that THERE IS NO CORRECT WAY TO LOVE OR BE LOVED. Yup. Everyone has to figure it out for themselves, and then it changes - as you change - as they change.

Emotions are a big driver of people, whether people recognise this or not, and emotions cannot be easily classified or coded or directed or understood, even.

so, in summary, when it comes to love and relationship, there is no such thing as 'legit' or 'not legit'. People may argue about this, but the truth bears me out. Everyone makes their own rules when it comes to making relationships work.

Stop accusing every guy of sexism around here, I am just stating my observation.

not every guy, just the sexist ones.

And I am not, you know nothing about me.

Go psychoanalyze elsewhere.

you made an implicit assumption that women are attracted to guys who can provide them with certain material goods. this is a pretty sexist thing to say.
if you don't want to be accused of sexism, don't post sexist comments.

But my comment wasn't sexist.

Sexism means the belief in the superiority of one gender over another, there's nothing in my comment shows that - I was just describing a societal phenomena.

My comment wasn't implying that women are after material goods, but what it implies they are often not attracted to losers.

In fact, I am one of the guys who believe that guys should be pickier and shouldn't date losers too, and i blame it on men for being too easy and shallow, they should adopt the "women-like"way when it comes to the selection criteria.

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt246582.html


So again, enough of your stupid false assumptions.

By definition, both can be described as misogynists, the men and the women who hate women - misogynism is the hatred against against women/girls and it's not exclusively practiced by men.

Full Definition of SEXISM
1: prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women
2: behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex

source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sexism

your comment "I call it the golden trio: job, place and car, a lot of aspie males fail to attract females because they lack those basics." pretty much fosters the a common stereotype of social roles based on sex.



and according to your definition, "loser" means those people who cannot provide women with certain material goods (car, house, a huge salary), so that's pretty much the same thing.

also, you've just called a huge number of forum members a loser.

What I said in the other thread
If a zoologist is describing the behavioral difference between lions and lionesses, that doesn't mean he/she believes lions are more superior than lionesses or vice-versa, she/he's just stating observations. Does this mean the zoologist is encouraging lions to form harems?

Should the zoologist lie and be blind enough and say false things like "oh...lionesses form harems, just like lions" in order to not be accused of something?

Sometimes political correctness hits crazy levels here.






Correction: Who cannot provide themselves, not who cannot provide women.

Last edited by The_Face_of_Boo on 20 Dec 2013, 5:12 pm, edited 3 times in total.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/504 ... -cars.html

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/hea ... en-shallow
''So, what did the researchers find? The young women were more likely to give their phone number to a young man who appeared to have more money and elevated status''In the high-status car condition, the confederates could boast getting a young woman's phone number 23.3% of the time. By contrast, the middle-status car condition and the low-status car condition saw 12.8% and 7.8% rates of compliance with the phone number request, respectively. These findings suggest that in real-life situations, women are inclined to give high-status men more of a chance.''

I do it, and I have told my girl not to take it personally. If all I do is spend time with a girl, I get irritbale. I start to lose my sense of masculinity.

Men like to solve their problems on their own. So usually the man will need space to sort something out. He won't want to talk about it. A lady pushing the man to talk when he has a problem that needs to solve will likely result in an angry response. Smart women know to let the man have his space to solve his problems. The man will come back when he solves his problem. On average, the man will take a day or two for this. He would likely drop you a line to open up the dialog to talk again and try and continue the intimate relationship.

Why women dont understand this is that when they tell the man they need space, it's an indicator that they are thinking of ending the relationship. So women panic when they hear the man say "I need some space to solve a problem." A man can calm her worrying mind by assuring her with words like "I will get back to you later. Your friends said they wanted to take you out shopping, go enjoy yourself." That there should realistically be a win-win. But misunderstandings can and will happen.

A smart man will know that their girl likes to talk about problems. A smart man will only give advice when the girl asks for it. Otherwise, the girl will think they guy is not listening to her. Most girls I met, they want to be heard and understood, not have their problems fixed unless they ask for that help.

Edit: Try not being insulted when I say "smart women." I should have said that people either learn this, or they don't. Same goes with "smart men"